CTA Case No. 627 (Resolution)

J IIEPUBLIC 01' THE PHILIPPINI!S COURT OF TAX APPEALS MANIU THE BOOKMARK , I NC. , C. I . A. Petitioner , CASE NO. 627 - versus - THE COI/JvliSSIOtiER OF CUSTOLS , Res pondent . X- - - - - - - - - - - - - X RE S 0 L UT I 0 N The petitioner is seeking the refund of 6,138.97 which it paid as customs . duties on certain importations of books on the ground that Proclamation No. 200 of the President of the Philippines exempts printed books from such duties . Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss alleging that this Court has no jurisdiction to enter- tain the appeal. The petition for review alleges that between Feb- ruary and July , 1956 , petitioner imported printed books ; that it was required to pay ~6 , 138. 97 as cust oms duties , i;jh said books ; that claiming t hat it was exempt from customs duties , the sum of �6 , 138. 97 was paid under protest on October 15 , 1956; that a formal de mand for the refund of said amount was l!1ade ; that despite repeat- ed requests for action on said claim for refund , neither the Collector of Customs of Manila nor respondent Com- missioner mf Customs has rendered a decision ; that fail - ing to secure a decision on said claim , a representative of counsel for petitioner was sent to the Bureau of Cus - toms who was "informed verbally that the refund would not be paid;" and that "outside of the verbal information

RESOLUTION - C. I . A. C SE NO . 627 - 2- received , nothing has been done by the Respondent to act on the formal requests of the petitioner. " In cases involving refund of customs duties , the law requires that the importer or person who paid the duties must file with the Collector of Customs a writ- ten protest within 30 days from the date of payment. (Sec .. 1370 , Adm. Code.) Without such written protest , the action of the Collector of Customs in collecting the cust oms duties shall be fin~l and conclusive , un- less the matter be correctible for manifest error. (Sec . 1371 , id . ) The form and s c ope of the written protest are prescribed in Section 1372. The Collector of Customs is required , after the fil i ng of a protest , to reexamine the matter and to render a decision there - on. (Sec. 1379 , id . ) If the Collector denies the pro - test , the party aggrieved may appeal to the Commission - er of Customs , but� such appeal must be filed within 15 days after notification in writing of su ch decision by the Collector of Customs. (Sec. 1380 , id. ) If the Commissioner of Customs affirms t he decision of the Collector of Customs , and the aggrieved party wishes to aop eal to this Court , the appeal must be filed with- in 30 days after receipt by him of the decision of the Commissi one r . (Sec . 11 , Republi c ct No. 1125. ) In mat - ters involving customs duties , only decisions of the Commissioner of Customs are appealable to this Court. (Sec . 7 Lg; , id . ; Rufino Lope z v . Court of Tax ppeals , G. R. No. L- 9274 , Feb. 1 , 1957 ; The cting Collector of Customs v. Court of Tax ppeals , G. R. No . L- 8811 ,

/ � RESOLUTION - c. r . . c SE t:o . 627 -3- Oct . 31 , 1957. ) In this case , neither the Collector of Customs nor respondent Commissioner of Customs has rendered a decision on petitioner ' s claim for refund . The only action allegedly taken on the matter by the Bureau of Customs is an oral information given by an officer that the refund would not be paid , petitioner admit - ting that �outside of the verbal information received , nothing has been done by ti1e Respondent to act on the formal requests of the petitioner. No decision hav - ing been rendered as yet by respondent on petitioner ' s claim for refund , this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the present appeal. (See Sampaguita Shoe & Slipper Factory v . Com. of Custons , G. R. No. L- 10285 , Jan . 14 , 1958 ; Dorotea de Leon v. Com. of Customs , C. T�� No . 381 , Dec. 18 , 1958 , motion for reconsideration de- / nied o~eb . 18 , 1959. ) VWHEREFCRE , the petition for review is hereby dis- missed without prejudice . No pronouncement as t costs .v SO RDERED. A~nila , pril 8 , 1959� � I CCNCUR: Presiding Judge Mariano Nable did not take part� �